psychologywikiaorg-20200213-history
Iconic memory
Iconic memory is the visual sensory memory (SM) register pertaining to the visual domain. It is a component of the visual memory system which also includes visual short term memory (VSTM) and long term memory (LTM). Iconic memory is described as a very brief (<1000 ms), pre-categorical, high capacity memory store. It contributes to VSTM by providing a coherent representation of our entire visual perception for a very brief period of time. Iconic memory assists in accounting for phenomena such as change blindness and continuity of experience during saccades. Iconic memory is no longer thought of as a single entity but instead, is composed of at least two distinctive components. Classic experiments including Sperling's partial report paradigm as well as modern techniques continue to provide insight into the nature of this SM store. Overview The occurrence of a sustained physiological image of an object after its physical offset has been observed by many individuals throughout history. One of the earliest documented accounts of the phenomenon was by Aristotle who proposed that afterimages were involved in the experience of a dream. Natural observation of the light trail produced by glowing ember at the end of a quickly moving stick sparked the interest of researchers in the 1700s and 1800s. They became the first to begin empirical studies on this phenomenon which later became known as visible persistence. In the 1900s, the role of visible persistence in memory gained considerable attention due to its hypothesized role as a pre-categorical representation of visual information in VSTM. In 1960, George Sperling began his classic partial-report experiments to confirm the existence of visual sensory memory and some of its characteristics including capacity and duration. It was not until 1967 that Ulric Neisser termed this quickly decaying memory store iconic memory. Approximately 20 years after Sperling’s original experiments, two separate components of visual sensory memory began to emerge: visual persistence and informational persistence. Sperling’s experiments mainly tested the information pertaining to a stimulus, whereas others such as Coltheart performed directs tests of visual persistence. In 1978, Di Lollo proposed a two-state model of visual sensory memory. Although it has been debated throughout history, current understanding of iconic memory makes a clear distinction between visual and informational persistence which are tested differently and have fundamentally different properties. Informational persistence which is the basis behind iconic memory is thought to be the key contributor to visual short term memory as the precategorical sensory store. Components of Iconic Memory The two main components of iconic memory are visible persistence and informational persistence. The first is a relatively brief (150 ms) pre-categorical visual representation of the physical image created by the sensory system. This would be the "snapshot" of what the individual is looking at and perceiving. The second component is a longer lasting memory store which represents a coded version of the visual image into post-categorical information. This would be the "raw data" that is taken in and processed by the brain. A third component may also be considered which is neural persistence: the physical activity and recordings of the visual system. Neural persistence is generally represented by neuroscientific techniques such as EEG and fMRI. Visible Persistence Visible persistence is the phenomenal impression that a visual image remains present after its physical offset. This can be considered a by-product of neural persistence. Visible persistence is more sensitive to the physical parameters of the stimulus than informational persistence which is reflected in its two key properties. : #The duration of visible persistence is inversely related to stimulus duration. This means that the longer the physical stimulus is presented for, the faster the visual image decays in memory. #The duration of visible persistence is inversely related to stimulus luminance. When the luminance, or brightness of a stimulus is increased, the duration of visible persistence decreases. Due to the involvement of the neural system, visible persistence is highly dependent on the physiology of the photoreceptors and activation of different cell types in the visual cortex. This visible representation is subject to masking effects whereby the presentation of interfering stimulus during, or immediately after stimulus offset interferes with one’s ability to remember the stimulus. Different techniques have been used to attempt to identify the duration of visible persistence. The Duration of Stimulus Technique is one in which a probe stimulus (auditory "click") is presented simultaneously with the onset, and on a separate trial, with the offset of a visual display. The difference represents the duration of the visible store which was found to be approximately 100-200 ms. Alternatively, the Phenomenal Continuity and Moving Slit Technique estimated visible persistence to be 300 ms. In the first paradigm, an image is presented discontinuously with blank periods in between presentations. If the duration is short enough, the participant will perceive a continuous image. Similarly, the Moving Slit Technique is also based on the participant observing a continuous image. Only instead of flashing the entire stimulus on and off, only a very narrow portion or "slit" of the image is displayed. When the slit is oscillated at the correct speed, a complete image is viewed. Neural Basis of Visible Persistence Underlying visible persistence is neural persistence of the visual sensory pathway. A prolonged visual representation begins with activation of photoreceptors in the retina. Although activation in both rods and cones has been found to persist beyond the physical offset of a stimulus, the rod system persists longer than cones. Other cells involved in a sustained visible image include M and P retinal ganglion cells. M cells (transient cells), are active only during stimulus onset and stimulus offset. P cells (sustained cells), show continuous activity during stimulus onset, duration, and offset. Cortical persistence of the visual image has been found in the primary visual cortex (V1) in the occipital lobe which is responsible for processing visual information. Informational Persistence Information persistence represents the information about a stimulus that persists after its physical offset. It is visual in nature, but not visible. Sperling's experiments were a test of informational persistence. Stimulus duration is the key contributing factor to the duration of informational persistence. As stimulus duration increases, so does the duration of the visual code. The non-visual components represented by informational persistence include the abstract characteristics of the image, as well as its spatial location. Due to the nature of informational persistence, unlike visible persistence, it is immune to masking effects. The characteristics of this component of iconic memory suggest that it plays the key role in representing a post-categorical memory store for which VSTM can access information for consolidation. Neural Basis of Information Persistence Although less research exists regarding the neural representation of informational persistence compared to visual persistence, new electrophysiological techniques have begun to reveal cortical areas involved. Unlike visible persistence, informational persistence is thought to rely on higher-level visual areas beyond the visual cortex. The anterior superior temporal sulcus (STS), a part of the ventral stream, was found to be active in macaques during iconic memory tasks. This brain region is associated with object recognition and object identity. Iconic memory’s role in change detection has been related to activation in the middle occipital gyrus (MOG). MOG activation was found to persist for approximately 2000ms suggesting a possibility that iconic memory has a longer duration than what was currently thought. Iconic memory is also influenced by genetics and proteins produced in the brain. Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) is a part of the neurotrophin family of nerve growth factors. Individuals with mutations to the BDNF gene which codes for BDNF have been shown to have shortened, less stable informational persistence. Role of Iconic Memory Iconic memory provides a smooth stream of visual information to the brain which can be extracted over an extended period of time by VSTM for consolidation into more stable forms. One of iconic memory's key roles is involved with change detection of our visual environment which assists in the perception of motion. Temporal Integration Iconic memory enables integrating visual information along a continuous stream of images, for example when watching a movie. In the primary visual cortex new stimuli do not erase information about previous stimuli. Instead the responses to the most recent stimulus contain about equal amounts of information about both this and the preceding stimulus. This one-back memory may be the main substrate for both the integration processes in iconic memory and masking effects. The particular outcome depends on whether the two subsequent component images (i.e., the “icons”) are meaningful only when isolated (masking) or only when superimposed (integration). Change Blindness The brief representation in iconic memory is thought to play a key role in the ability to detect change in a visual scene. The phenomenon of change blindness has provided insight into the nature of the iconic memory store and its role in vision. Change blindness refers to an inability to detect differences in two successive scenes separated by a very brief blank interval, or interstimulus interval (ISS). When scenes are presented without an ISS, the change is easily detectable. It is thought that the detailed memory store of the scene in iconic memory is erased by each ISS, which renders the memory inaccessible. This reduces the ability to make comparisons between successive scenes. Saccadic Eye Movement It has been suggested that iconic memory plays a role in providing continuity of experience during saccadic eye movements. These rapid eye movements occur in approximately 30 ms and each fixation lasts for approximately 300 ms. Research suggests however, that memory for information between saccades is largely dependent on VSTM and not iconic memory. Instead of contributing to trans-saccadic memory, information stored in iconic memory is thought to actually be erased during saccades. A similar phenomenon occurs during eye-blinks whereby both automatic and intentional blinking disrupts the information stored in iconic memory. Development of Iconic memory The development of iconic memory begins at birth and continues as development of the primary and secondary visual system occurs. By 5 years of age, children have developed the same unlimited capacity of iconic memory that adults posses. The duration of informational persistence however increases from approximately 200 ms at age 5, to an asymptotic level of 1000 ms as an adult (>11 years). A small decrease in visual persistence occurs with age. A decrease of approximately 20 ms has been observed when comparing individuals in their early 20's to those in their late 60's. Throughout one’s lifetime, mild cognitive impairments (MCIs) may develop such as errors in episodic memory (autobiographical memory about people, places, and their contex), and working memory (the active processing component of STM) due to damage in hippocampal and association cortical areas. Episodic memories are autobiographical events that a person can discuss. Individuals with MCIs have be found to show decreased iconic memory capacity and duration. Iconic memory impairment in those with MCIs may be used as a predictor for the development of more severe deficits such as Alzheimer’s disease and dementia later in life. Sperling's Partial Report Procedure In 1960, George Sperling became the first to use a partial report paradigm to investigate the bipartite model of VSTM. In Sperling's initial experiments in 1960, observers were presented with a tachistoscopic visual stimulus for a brief period of time (50 ms) consisting of either a 3x3 or 3x4 array of alphanumeric characters such as: :P Y F G :V J S A :D H B U Recall was based on a cue which followed the offset of the stimulus and directed the subject to recall a specific line of letters from the initial display. Memory performance was compared under two conditions: whole report and partial report. Whole Report The whole report condition required participants to recall as many elements from the original display in their proper spatial locations as possible. Participants were typically able to recall three to five characters from the twelve character display (~35%). This suggests that whole report is limited by a memory system with a capacity of four-to-five items. Partial Report The partial report condition required participants to identify a subset of the characters from the visual display using cued recall. The cue was a tone which sounded at various time intervals (~50 ms) following the offset of the stimulus. The frequency of the tone (high, medium, or low) indicated which set of characters within the display were to be reported. Due to the fact that participants did not know which row would be cued for recall, performance in the partial report condition can be regarded as a random sample of an observer's memory for the entire display. This type of sampling revealed that immediately after stimulus offset, participants could recall most letters (9 out of 12 letters) in a given row suggesting that 75% of the entire visual display was accessible to memory. This is a dramatic increase in the hypothesized capacity of iconic memory derived from full-report trials. Variations of the partial report procedure Visual Bar Cue A small variation in Sperling’s partial report procedure which yielded similar results was the use of a visual bar marker instead of an auditory tone as the retrieval cue. In this modification, participants were presented with a visual display of 2 rows of 8 letters for 50 ms. The probe was a visual bar placed above or below a letter’s position simultaneously with array offset. Participants had an average accuracy of 65% when asked to recall the designated letter. Temporal Variations Varying the time between the offset of the display and the auditory cue allowed Sperling to estimate the time course of sensory memory. Sperling deviated from the original procedure by varying tone presentation from immediately after stimulus offset, to 150, 500, or 1000 ms. Using this technique, the initial memory for a stimulus display was found to decay rapidly after display offset. At approximately 1000 ms after stimulus offset, there was no difference in recall between the partial-report and whole report conditions. Overall, experiments using partial report provided evidence for a rapidly decaying sensory trace lasting approximately 1000 ms after the offset of a display Circle Cue & Masking The effects of masking were identified by the use of a circle presented around a letter as the cue for recall. When the circle was presented before the visual stimulus onset or simultaneously with stimulus offset, recall matched that found when using a bar or tone. However, if a circle was used as a cue 100 ms after stimulus offset, there was decreased accuracy in recall. As the delay of circle presentation increased, accuracy once again improved. This phenomenon was an example of metacontrast masking. Masking was also observed when images such as random lines were presented immediately after stimulus offset. See also *Chunking *Short term memory *Span of apprehension References Further reading Key texts Books *Averbach, E., & Sperling, G. (1961). Short term storage of information in vision. In C. Cherry (Ed.), Information Theory (pp. 196-211). London: Butterworth. Papers *Acosta, E., & Crawford, H. J. (1985). Iconic memory and hypnotizability: Processing speed, skill, or strategy differences? : International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis Vol 33(3) Jul 1985, 236-245. *Balazsi, R., & Rusu, C. (2005). Methodological difficulties in assessing working memory: What do span tasks measure? : Cognitie Creier Comportament Vol 9(1) Mar 2005, 107-135. *Baron, R. J. (1985). Visual memories and mental images: International Journal of Man-Machine Studies Vol 23(3) Sep 1985, 275-311. *Baumeister, A. A., Runcie, D., & Gardepe, J. (1984). Processing of information in iconic memory: Differences between nonretarded and retarded subjects: Journal of Abnormal Psychology Vol 93(4) Nov 1984, 433-447. *Beck, A. R., & Fritz, H. (1998). Can people who have aphasia learn iconic codes? : AAC: Augmentative and Alternative Communication Vol 14(3) Sep 1998, 184-196. *Becker, M. W., Pashler, H., & Anstis, S. M. (2000). The role of iconic memory in change-detection tasks: Perception Vol 29(3) 2000, 273-286. *Black, I. L., & Barbee, J. G. (1985). Effect of a partial report visual cue on information available in tachistoscopic presentations of alphanumeric characters varying in number and type: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 61(3, Pt 1) Dec 1985, 815-820. *Brattico, E., Winkler, I., Naatanen, R., Paavilainen, P., & Tervaniemi, M. (2002). Simultaneous storage of two complex temporal sound patterns in auditory sensory memory: Neuroreport: For Rapid Communication of Neuroscience Research Vol 13(14) Oct 2002, 1747-1751. *Britton, B. K. (1980). Cognitive Psychology Textbook Provides a Novel Integration: PsycCRITIQUES Vol 25 (1), Jan, 1980. *Burns, B. (1987). Is stimulus structure in the mind's eye? An examination of dimensional structure in iconic memory: The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A: Human Experimental Psychology Vol 39(3, Sect A) Aug 1987, 385-408. *Burns, B., & Hopkins, A. (1987). Integral and separable stimulus structure in iconic memory: A replication and extension of Burns (1987): Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 64(1) Feb 1987, 263-270. *Cattell, J. M. (1886). The inertia of the eye and brain. Brain, 8, 295-312. *Chlewinski, Z., & Grzywa, A. (1983). Iconic and symbolic representation of abstract concepts in paranoid schizophrenics: Role of selective attention and memory: Przeglad Psychologiczny Vol 26(4) 1983, 797-814. *Chow, S. L. (1986). Iconic memory, location information, and partial report: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance Vol 12(4) Nov 1986, 455-465. *Chow, S. L. (1991). Partial report: Iconic store or two buffers? : Journal of General Psychology Vol 118(2) Apr 1991, 147-169. *Cladellas, R., & Castello, A. (2006). Differences in the iconic and symbolic codification in a task of mental rotation: Revista de Psicologia General y Aplicada Vol 59(4) Oct 2006, 493-508. *Cohene, L. S. (1984). Rejoinder to Holding and Orenstein: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 58(1) Feb 1984, 254. *Cohene, L. S. (1984). "Sensory storage of fragmentary displays": Refutation of a theory of iconic memory? : Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 58(1) Feb 1984, 241-242. *Cowan, N., Saults, J. S., & Nugent, L. D. (1997). The role of absolute and relative amounts of time in forgetting within immediate memory: The case of tone-pitch comparisons: Psychonomic Bulletin & Review Vol 4(3) Sep 1997, 393-397. *Coyne, A. C., Burger, M. C., Berry, J. M., & Botwinick, J. (1987). Adult age, information processing, and partial report performance: Journal of Genetic Psychology Vol 148(2) Jun 1987, 219-224. *di Lollo, V. (1985). E pluribus unum: Rursus? A comment on Loftus, Johnson, and Shimamura's "How much is an icon worth?" Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance Vol 11(3) Jun 1985, 379-383. *di Lollo, V., & Dixon, P. (1988). Two forms of persistence in visual information processing: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance Vol 14(4) Nov 1988, 671-681. *di Lollo, V., & Dixon, P. (1992). Is the icon's worth apples and oranges? Some fruitful thoughts on Loftus, Duncan, and Gehrig (1992): Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance Vol 18(2) May 1992, 550-555. *Dykes, J. (1974). Review of Iconic Communication: An Annotated Bibliography: PsycCRITIQUES Vol 19 (8), Aug, 1974. *Elliot, M. A., & Muller, H. J. (2000). Evidence for a 40-Hz oscillatory short-term visual memory revealed by human reaction-time measurements: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition Vol 26(3) May 2000, 703-718. *Elliott, D. (1990). Intermittent visual pickup and goal directed movement: A review: Human Movement Science Vol 9(3-5) Sep 1990, 531-548. *Flaherty, M. (1994). Hemispheric asymmetry in familiar face recognition: Absence of laterality in iconic storage: Psychological Studies Vol 39(2-3) Jul-Nov 1994, 88-93. *Foley, R., & Mulhern, G. (1991). Capacity, duration, and position effects in visual memory following a successive field procedure: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 73(1) Aug 1991, 195-198. *Gallace, A., Tan, H. Z., Haggard, P., & Spence, C. (2008). Short term memory for tactile stimuli: Brain Research Vol 1190 Jan 2008, 132-142. *Gegenfurtner, K. R., & Sperling, G. (1993). Information transfer in iconic memory experiments: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance Vol 19(4) Aug 1993, 845-866. *George, N., Jemel, B., Fiori, N., & Renault, B. (2000). Holistic and part-based face representations: Evidence from the memory span of the "face superiority effect." Current Psychology Letters: Behaviour, Brain & Cognition No 1 2000, 89-106. *Giannoulis, K., & Wilding, J. (1992). A deficit of iconic memory in children with attentional problems assigned to nurture groups: British Journal of Developmental Psychology Vol 10(2) Jun 1992, 199-201. *Gill, N. F., & Dallenbach, K. M. (1926). A preliminary study of the range of attention. American Journal of Psychology, 37, 247-256. *Gilmore, G. C., Allan, T. M., & Royer, F. L. (1986). Iconic memory and aging: Journal of Gerontology Vol 41(2) Mar 1986, 183-190. *Greene, E. (2007). Information persistence in the integration of partial cues for object recognition: Perception & Psychophysics Vol 69(5) Jul 2007, 772-784. *Groner, M. T., Bischof, W. F., & di Lollo, V. (1988). A model of visible persistence and temporal integration: Spatial Vision Vol 3(4) 1988, 293-304. *Guopeng, C., Xiaoli, W., Yunqiu, F., Lass, U., Yan, S., Becker, D., et al. (2004). A Study of the Sperling Paradigm: The Allocation of Attention When Stimulus Are Presented in Different Mode: Psychological Science (China) Vol 27(3) May 2004, 563-566. *Haber, R. N. (1985). An icon can have no worth in the real world: Comments on Loftus, Johnson, and Shimamura's "How much is an icon worth?" Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance Vol 11(3) Jun 1985, 374-378. *Hankala, A. (1996). The integrating function of iconic memory: Psychologia Wychowawcza Vol 39(1) Jan-Feb 1996, 1-12. *Holding, D. H., & Orenstein, H. B. (1984). Reply to Cohene: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 58(1) Feb 1984, 246. *Hong, S. H., Khang, B.-g., & Chung, C. S. (1987). Early processing of identity and category information: Korean Journal of Psychology Vol 6(2) 1987, 179-189. *Hornstein, H. A., & Mosley, J. L. (1987). Iconic memory deficit of mildly mentally retarded individuals: American Journal of Mental Deficiency Vol 91(4) Jan 1987, 415-421. *Irwin, D. E., & Brown, J. S. (1987). Tests of a model of informational persistence: Canadian Journal of Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie Vol 41(3) Sep 1987, 317-338. *Iwasaki, S. (1986). Iconic memory: Japanese Psychological Review Vol 29(2) 1986, 123-149. *Jaaskelainen, I. P., Hautamaki, M., Naatanen, R., & Ilmoniemi, R. J. (1999). Temporal span of human echoic memory and mismatch negativity: Revisited: Neuroreport: For Rapid Communication of Neuroscience Research Vol 10(6) Apr 1999, 1305-1308. *Jiang, Y., Olson, I. R., & Chun, M. M. (2000). Organization of visual short-term memory: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition Vol 26(3) May 2000, 683-702. *Johnson, K. E., Younger, B. A., & Cuellar, R. E. (2005). Toddlers' Understanding of Iconic Models: Cross-Task Comparison of Selection and Preferential Looking Responses: Infancy Vol 8(2) 2005, 189-200. *Kampf, U. (1986). Processes of disintegration and formation of visual structures in sensoric memory: Our experience from a stroboscopic study into early processing: Studia Psychologica Vol 28(3-4) 1986, 321-333. *Keysers, C., Xiao, D. K., Foldiak, P., & Perrett, D. I. (2005). Out of sight but not out of mind: The neurophysiology of iconic memory in the superior temporal sulcus: Cognitive Neuropsychology Vol 22(3-4) May-Jun 2005, 316-332. *Kikuchi, T. (1987). Temporal characteristics of visual memory: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance Vol 13(3) Aug 1987, 464-477. *Koelsch, S., Schroger, E., & Tervaniemi, M. (1999). Superior pre-attentive auditory processing in musicians: Neuroreport: For Rapid Communication of Neuroscience Research Vol 10(6) Apr 1999, 1309-1313. *Krekelberg, B. (2001). The persistence of position: Vision Research Vol 41(4) Feb 2001, 529-539. *Lawrence, D. M., & Breslow, N. (1985). Tick-tack-toe in iconic memory: A demonstration of informational persistence: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 61(2) Oct 1985, 647-650. *Lemay, M., & Proteau, L. (2002). Effects of target presentation time, recall delay, and aging on accuracy of manual pointing to remembered targets: Journal of Motor Behavior Vol 34(1) Mar 2002, 11-23. *Lieberth, A. K., & Gamble, M. B. (1991). The role of iconicity in sign language learning by hearing adults: Journal of Communication Disorders Vol 24(2) Apr 1991, 89-99. *Loftus, G. R. (1985). On worthwhile icons: Reply to Di Lollo and Haber: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance Vol 11(3) Jun 1985, 384-388. *Loftus, G. R., & Busey, T. A. (1992). Multidimensional models and iconic decay: Reply to di Lollo and Dixon: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance Vol 18(2) May 1992, 556-561. *Loftus, G. R., Duncan, J., & Gehrig, P. (1992). On the time course of perceptual information that results from a brief visual presentation: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance Vol 18(2) May 1992, 530-549. *Loftus, G. R., Johnson, C. A., & Shimamura, A. P. (1985). How much is an icon worth? : Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance Vol 11(1) Feb 1985, 1-13. *Long, G. M. (1985). The varieties of visual persistence: Comments on Yeomans and Irwin: Perception & Psychophysics Vol 38(4) Oct 1985, 381-385. *Long, G. M., & Homolka, J. L. (1992). Effects of uniform field flicker on type 1 and type 2 visible persistence: Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society Vol 30(1) Jan 1992, 51-54. *Long, G. M., & O'Saben, C. L. (1989). The changing face of visual persistence: American Journal of Psychology Vol 102(2) Sum 1989, 197-210. *Lu, Z.-L., Neuse, J., Madigan, S., & Dosher, B. A. (2005). Fast decay of iconic memory in observers with mild cognitive impairments: PNAS Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America Vol 102(5) Feb 2005, 1797-1802. *Marquez, S., Zubiaur, M., Serrano, I., & Delgado, J. (1989). Hemispheric asymmetry and visual perception: Absence of laterality effects in iconic storage: Medical Science Research Vol 17(24) Dec 1989, 1019-1020. *Martens, U., Schweinberger, S. R., Kiefer, M., & Burton, A. M. (2006). Masked and unmasked electrophysiological repetition effects of famous faces: Brain Research Vol 1109(1) Sep 2006, 146-157. *McClure, J. T., Browning, T., Vantrease, C., Bittle, S., & Barker, M. (1997). The iconic memory skills of brain injury survivors before and after iconic memory skills training: Journal of Cognitive Rehabilitation Vol 15(3) May-Jun 1997, 20-23. *Mewhort, D. J., Butler, B. E., Feldman-Stewart, D., & Tramer, S. (1988). "Iconic memory," location information, and the bar-probe task: A reply to Chow (1986): Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance Vol 14(4) Nov 1988, 729-737. *Mewhort, D. J., & Leppmann, K. P. (1985). Information persistence: Testing spatial and identity information with a voice probe: Psychological Research Vol 47(1) Apr 1985, 51-58. *Orenstein, H. B., & Holding, D. H. (1987). Attentional factors in iconic memory and visible persistence: The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A: Human Experimental Psychology Vol 39(1-A) Feb 1987, 149-166. *Orlansky, M. D., & Bonvillian, J. D. (1985). Iconicity and sign language: A reply to Lloyd, Loeding, and Doherty (1985): Journal of Speech & Hearing Disorders Vol 50(4) Nov 1985, 407-408. *Parente, R., Anderson-Parente, J. K., & Shaw, B. (1989). Retraining the mind's eye: Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation Vol 4(2) Jun 1989, 53-62. *Parente, R., Kolakowsky, S., Hoffman, B., & Blake, S. (1998). Retraining the mind's eye: A review of existing research: Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation Vol 5(1) Spr 1998, 48-58. *Perez Abalo, M. C., Valdes Sosa, M., & Fernandez Dorta, L. (1983). Visual masking in a comparison task with memory: Revista del Hospital Psiquiatrico de La Habana Vol 24(2) Apr-Jun 1983, 223-230. *Poggi, I. (2008). Iconicity in different types of gestures: Gesture Vol 8(1) 2008, 45-61. *Priout, P., Guedon, O., Proteau, L., & Gauthier, G. M. (2002). Pointing to a memorized position in a shifting visual context: Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale Vol 56(4) Dec 2002, 253-262. *Rogers, P. J., & Aston, F. M. (1990). The role of research in children's education: Educational Studies Vol 16(2) 1990, 151-167. *Ruff, C. C., Kristjansson, A., & Driver, J. (2007). Readout from iconic memory and selective spatial attention involve similar neural processes: Psychological Science Vol 18(10) Oct 2007, 901-909. *Ruiz-Vargas, J. M. (1985). Iconic memory and perception: A defense of the iconic storage concept in visual information processing: Revista de Psicologia General y Aplicada Vol 40(4) 1985, 631-646. *Russo, T. (2004). Iconicity and Productivity in Sign Language Discourse: An Analysis of Three LIS Discourse Registers: Sign Language Studies Vol 4(2) Win 2004, I64-I97. *Sakai, K. (2006). Limited Capacity for Contour Curvature in Iconic Memory: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 102(3) Jun 2006, 611-631. *Schoppig, A., Clarke, S., Walsh, V., Assal, G., Meuli, R., & Cowley, A. (1999). Short-term memory for colour following posterior hemispheric lesions in man: Neuroreport: For Rapid Communication of Neuroscience Research Vol 10(6) Apr 1999, 1379-1384. *Schwartz, B. D., & Winstead, D. K. (1985). Icon formation in chronic schizophrenics: Biological Psychiatry Vol 20(9) Sep 1985, 1015-1018. *Schwartz, B. D., & Winstead, D. K. (1988). Visible persistence in paranoid schizophrenics: Biological Psychiatry Vol 23(1) Jan 1988, 3-12. *Shioiri, S., & Cavanagh, P. (1992). Visual persistence of figures defined by relative motion: Vision Research Vol 32(5) May 1992, 943-951. *Smith, M. B. (2002). The polysemy of German es , iconicity, and the notion of conceptual distance: Cognitive Linguistics Vol 13(1) 2002, 67-112. *Smithson, H., & Mollon, J. (2006). Do masks terminate the icon? : The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Vol 59(1) Jan 2006, 150-160. *Sperling, G. (1960). The information available in brief visual presentations. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 74(11), 1-30. *Sperling, G. (1963). A model for visual memory tasks. Human Factors, 5, 19-31. *Sperling, G. (1967). Successive approximations to a model for short term memory. Acta Psychologica, 27, 285-292. *Steinhauer, S. R., Locke, J., & Hill, S. Y. (1997). Vigilance and iconic memory in children at high risk for alcoholism: Journal of Studies on Alcohol Vol 58(4) Jul 1997, 428-434. *Stephens, R., & Runcie, D. (1990). Individual differences in spatial and identity information processing in iconic memory: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 71(3, Pt 2) Dec 1990, 1293-1294. *Suslow, T., & Arolt, V. (1996). Disorders of early information processing and vigilance as vulnerability markers of schizophrenia: Fortschritte der Neurologie, Psychiatrie Vol 64(3) Mar 1996, 90-104. *Tavassoli, N. T., & Han, J. K. (2001). Scripted thought: Processing Korean Hancha and Hangul in a multimedia context: Journal of Consumer Research Vol 28(3) Dec 2001, 482-493. *Thomas, L. E., & Irwin, D. E. (2006). Voluntary eyeblinks disrupt iconic memory: Perception & Psychophysics Vol 68(3) Apr 2006, 475-488. *Tijus, C. A., & Reeves, A. (2004). Rapid iconic erasure without masking: Spatial Vision Vol 17(4-5) 2004, 483-495. *Tolar, T. D., Lederberg, A. R., Gokhale, S., & Tomasello, M. (2008). The development of the ability to recognize the meaning of iconic signs: Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education Vol 13(2) Spr 2008, 225-240. *van den Bosch, J. J., & Bohnen, H. G. M. (1998). An experimental comparison of alphanumeric and iconic formats of the Flight Mode Annunciator: International Journal of Aviation Psychology Vol 8(4) 1998, 335-349. *Velichkovsky, B. M., Challis, B. H., & Pomplun, M. (1995). Working memory and work with memory: Visuospatial and further components of processing: Zeitschrift fur Experimentelle Psychologie Vol 42(4) 1995, 672-701. *Wender, K. F., & Rothkegel, R. (2000). Subitizing and its subprocesses: Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung Vol 64(2) Dec 2000, 81-92. *Wu, Y. C., & Coulson, S. (2005). Meaningful gestures: Electrophysiological indices of iconic gesture comprehension: Psychophysiology Vol 42(6) Nov 2005, 654-667. *Zwaan, R. A., & Yaxley, R. H. (2003). Spatial iconicity affects semantic relatedness judgments: Psychonomic Bulletin & Review Vol 10(4) Dec 2003, 954-958. Additional material Books *Loftus, G. R., & Hogden, J. (1988). Extraction of information from complex visual stimuli: Memory performance and phenomenological appearance. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. *Massaro, D. W., & Loftus, G. R. (1996). Sensory and perceptual storage: Data and theory. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Papers *Google Scholar Dissertations *Gegenfurtner, K. R. (1991). Iconic memory, color discrimination and contrast detection: Dissertation Abstracts International. *Goossens, C. A. (1984). The relative iconicity and learnability of verb referents differentially represented by manual signs, Blissymbols, and Rebus symbols: An investigation with moderately retarded individuals: Dissertation Abstracts International. *Hankey, P. W., Jr. (1996). The development and evaluation of menu-option names and menu structures. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. *Kiphart, M. J. (1985). Voluntary control and anticipatory cue effects for briefly presented visual stimuli: Dissertation Abstracts International. *Liu, S.-H. (2008). Two studies of human information processing: Visual very short-term memory and visual object attention. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. *Mizuko, M. I. (1986). Iconicity and initial learning of three symbol systems in normal three year old children: Dissertation Abstracts International. *Sandin, M. D. (1996). The costs and benefits of current iconic representations. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. *Stephens, R. L. (1989). The relationship between cognitive ability and the iconic processing of spatial and identity information: Dissertation Abstracts International. *Wittig, D. L. (1986). Effect of two metacognitive intervention strategies on the Listening Capacity Measure of the Informal Reading Inventory on the performance of fourth grade students of low and high auditory memory achievement levels: Dissertation Abstracts International. *Zerlin, S. A. (1994). An investigation into cross-saccadic memory. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. External links Category:Memory processes Category:Short term memory